California’s felony sentencing structure has become increasingly complex over the last forty years. Despite this complexity, this analysis also shows that changing just one section of the Penal Code — a default sentence that has not been adjusted since 1976 — would affect the sentence length of 71% of felony offenses in current law.

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278

As the COVID-19 pandemic struck the US in early 2020 and led to social dislocations, financial and health stresses, and alterations in our daily routines, crime rates in California and across the country also changed, sometimes in unpredictable ways. In this brief, we use Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), California Department of Justice (DOJ) data, and US Census data to assess the degree to which crime in 2020 changed relative to crime in 2019 in California. We also compare crime trends in California to trends in other states. This policy brief expands on testimony provided to the California Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, and includes 437 municipalities, whereas the testimony only included municipalities with over 100,000 people.

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278.

Sentence enhancements are widely used in California and can greatly increase an individual’s prison sentence, which in turn increases the size of the state’s prison population at a given time as people are incarcerated for longer periods.1 Proposition 8, passed by voters in 1982, provided the first major addition to sentence enhancements in California since the passage of the Determinate Sentencing Act of 1976 (Figure 1). This law created what is colloquially known as the “nickel prior.” As originally written, if a person had previously been convicted of a serious felony offense, the enhancement added an additional five years onto any sentence for a new serious offense,2 regardless of when the earlier conviction had occurred.3 This fact sheet highlights patterns in the use of nickel prior enhancements for people admitted to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) before and after Senate Bill 1393 (SB 1393) took effect in 2019.4 As of August 2023, there are just under 14,000 people currently in prison who have a nickel prior as part of their sentence. Judges initially had discretion in dismissing nickel priors, but this discretion was eliminated by legislation enacted in 1986. Prosecutors retained the power to decide whether to charge nickel prior enhancements and if they chose to use the enhancement, it became mandatory for a judge to apply. However, prosecutors did not always charge eligible cases or would agree to dismiss the nickel prior as part of a plea bargain, resulting in eligible prison admissions that did not receive the enhancement. In 2019, SB 1393 reinstated judicial discretion to dismiss nickel priors “in furtherance of justice.” Since 2015, the nickel prior has been the second most common sentence enhancement (after the second strike enhancement) used in California for people admitted to prison. Over 11,600 admissions to prison had a nickel prior enhancement, which accounted for 11% of additional years added to base sentences, or over 58,000 years.5

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278.

This policy brief highlights patterns in racial/ethnic and gender disparities in police stop rates, actions taken during stops, and stop outcomes in California, as reported in the Racial Identity and Profiling Act (RIPA) data for calendar year 2021, which includes data on nearly 3.2 million stops. Many of the patterns reported here have been documented and explored in detail in prior annual reports published by the RIPA Board as well as in an independent analysis of the data from a prior year.

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278

Sentence enhancements are used to add time to an individual’s base sentence. California uses over 100 unique enhancements. This report analyzes data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to understand the role of sentence enhancements in California’s corrections system. It fnds that enhancements lengthen average sentences and are more likely to impact the sentences of men and Black and American Indian people who are sentenced to prison, application varies by county, and that enhancements contribute to the overall size of the state prison population.

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278

Criminal sentences resulting in admission to a California state prison are determined by both the nature of the criminal incident as well as the criminal history of the person convicted of the offense. Cases with convictions for multiple offenses may lead to multiple sentences that are either served concurrently or consecutively. Characteristics of the offense (such as the use of a f irearm) or aspects of the person’s criminal history (such as a prior conviction for a serious or violent offense) may add to the length of the base sentence through what are commonly referred to as offense or case enhancements, respectively. California’s Three-Strikes law presents a unique form of sentence enhancement that lengthens sentences based on an individual’s criminal history. Consider an individual with one prior serious or violent felony conviction (one “strike”) who is subsequently convicted of another felony. Under Three Strikes, the sentence for the subsequent felony will be double the length specified for the crime regardless of whether the new conviction is for a serious or violent offense. For an individual with two prior violent or serious felony convictions, a third conviction for a serious or violent felony would receive an indeterminate prison term of at least 25 years to life, with the exact date of release determined by the Parole Board. 

This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grants MRP-19-600774 and M21PR3278.